alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Wabridge Safe Flight Checklist

• Before any flight, the pilot and spotter will perfo rm a walkthrough of the area to be documented to identify any pitfalls or dangers • A pre-task analysis will be performed with the site safety supervisor to ensure a high level of safety is maintained during the course of the opera tion. • The area shall be cleared of all non-essential pers onnel prior to takeoff • Ensure any non-flight related personnel agree to t he image capture/filming that will be occurring • Establish a safe perimeter to ensure no one strays into the work area during the flight • The Pilot and spotter shall perform a pre-flight ch eck of the aerial platform: o Ensure all batteries to be used are fully charged o Ensure all primary and backup controllers are charg ed o Inspect all 4 rotor blades for signs of damage or w ear • The drone will be assembled and activated as per th e manufacturer’s instructions • Once powered up, the following checks will be perfo rmed: o Ensure the GPS receives an adequate signal o Test the rotors and ensure they respond to the cont rol without taking off o Ensure the external lights on the device are lit an d visible
###### Editorial Note on [Subchapter A of Chapter VIII](/current/title-7/chapter-VIII/subchapter-A)

#### Authority:

[7 U.S.C. 71-87K](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/7/71), [1621-1627](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/7/1621).

###### Editorial Note on [Subchapter A of Chapter VIII](/current/title-7/chapter-VIII/subchapter-A)

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at [84 FR 45645](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/84-FR-45645), Aug. 30, 2019.

#### § 810.204 Grades and grade requirements for Six-rowed Malting barley.

| Grade | Minimum limits of— | | | Maximum limits of— | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Test weight per bushel (pounds) | Suitable malting types (percent) | Sound barley1 (percent) | Damaged kernels1 (percent) | Wild oats (percent) | Foreign material (percent) | Other grains (percent) | Skinned and broken kernels (percent) | Thin barley (percent) |
| U.S. No. 1 | 47.0 | 97.0 | 98.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 7.0 |
| U.S. No. 2 | 45.0 | 97.0 | 98.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 6.0 | 10.0 |
| U.S. No. 3 | 43.0 | 95.0 | 96.0 | 4.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 8.0 | 15.0 |
| U.S. No. 4 | 43.0 | 95.0 | 93.0 | 5.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 10.0 | 15.0 |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels or considered against sound barley. | | | | | | | | | |

Note:

Malting barley must not be infested in accordance with [§ 810.107(b)](/on/2024-09-20/title-7/section-810.107#p-810.107(b)) and must not contain any special grades as defined in [§ 810.206](/on/2024-09-20/title-7/section-810.206). Six-rowed Malting barley varieties not meeting the requirements of this section must be graded in accordance with standards established for the class Barley.

[[82 FR 20543](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/82-FR-20543), May 3, 2017]
EXHBIT  32.2
------------

CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT  TO
18  U.S.C.  SECTION  1350,
AS  ADOPTED  PURSUANT  TO
SECTION  906  OF  THE  SARBANES-OXLEY  ACT  OF  2002

In  connection  with  the  Quarterly Report of Bluetorch Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Bernard Gurr, Chief
Financial  Officer  of  the  Company,  certifies  to  the best of his knowledge,
pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  ss.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  ss.  906 of the

Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and

(2)  The  information  contained  in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects,  the  financial  condition  and  result  of operations of the Company.




                          /s/ Bernard Gurr
                          -----------------------------
                          Bernard Gurr
                          Chief Financial Officer
                          November 17, 2004



                                       15
TABLE 8

ORGANIZATIONAL FORM OF THE MOST COMMON NONBANK AFFILIATES 

OF BANKING COMPANIES 

September 30, 1996

NONBANK ACTIVITY COMPANY SUBSIDIARIES BANK SUBSIDIARIES

NUMBER OF HOLDING NUMBER OF 

CONSUMER FINANCE 318 124

LEASING 191 365

MORTGAGE BANKING 129 201

DATA PROCESSING 123 96

CREDIT-RELATED

INSURANCE AGENCY/

BROKERAGE 72 74

COMMERCIAL FINANCE 46 39

Source: Federal Reserve Board National Information Center.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5305 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5305

 To amend title 49, United States Code, relating to air carrier safety.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 29, 1994

 Mr. Oberstar introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Public Works and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 49, United States Code, relating to air carrier safety.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 44701 of 
title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
    ``(f) Standard of Safety for Air Carriers.--Not later than March 1, 
1996, the minimum safety standards prescribed by the Administrator 
under subsection (b)(1) shall apply uniformly to all operations by air 
carriers providing air transportation, without regard to the seating or 
payload capacity of the aircraft involved; except that the 
Administrator may--
            ``(1) prescribe alternative safety standards for the 
        operation of aircraft of a type approved by the Administrator 
        for transportation of no more than 9 passengers (exclusive of 
        flight crew);
            ``(2) prescribe alternative safety standards for operation 
        of an aircraft of a type approved by the Administrator for 
        transportation of no more than 30 passengers (exclusive of 
        flight crew) if such aircraft is not used to provide scheduled 
        air transportation; and
            ``(3) prescribe alternative safety standards, ensuring an 
        equivalent level of safety, for the operation of aircraft of a 
        type designed for the transportation of no more than 19 
        passengers (exclusive of flight crew) for which application for 
        design approval was made to the Administrator prior to February 
        17, 1987.
Alternative standards may be prescribed under paragraph (3) only for 
specific areas as to which the Administrator finds that alternative 
standards are necessary because the aircraft's approved design makes 
compliance with one or more of the uniform standards impossible.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHBIT  32.1
------------

CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT  TO
18  U.S.C.  SECTION  1350,
AS  ADOPTED  PURSUANT  TO
SECTION  906  OF  THE  SARBANES-OXLEY  ACT  OF  2002

In  connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  of  Pacific  Peak Investments (the
"Company")  on  Form  10-Q  for  the quarter ended June 30, 2005, as filed  with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on  the  date hereof (the "Report"),
Bruce  MacGregor, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to the  best
of  his  knowledge,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to  ss.
906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and

(2)  The  information  contained  in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects,  the  financial  condition  and  results  of  operations  of  the
Company.




              /s/  Bruce  MacGregor
              -----------------------
              Bruce  MacGregor
              Chief  Executive  Officer
              August  10,  2005
§ 80.63 Does an agency have to allocate costs in multipurpose projects and facilities? Yes. A State fish and wildlife agency must allocate costs in multipurpose projects and facilities. A grant-funded project or facility is multipurpose if it carries out the purposes of: ( a ) A single grant program under the Acts; and
( b ) Another grant program under the Acts, a grant program not under the Acts, or an activity unrelated to grants.
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Coleman, Willis and Overton Argued at Alexandria, Virginia

JAMES MITCHELL RANDOLPH

v. Record No. 1201-95-4 OPINION BY JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA APRIL 30, 1996

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LOUDOUN COUNTY James H. Chamblin, Judge Jeffrey B. Rice for appellant. Michael T. Judge, Assistant Attorney General (James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

James Randolph, defendant, appeals his convictions of spousal rape and forcible sodomy on the ground that he was not tried within the statutory five-month time limit required by Code § 19.2-243. Finding no error, we affirm the convictions. Randolph was arrested December 18, 1993, and a preliminary hearing was held January 10, 1994, at which time probable cause was found. He was held in custody continuously from the time of the probable cause hearing until trial. Upon motion of defendant, the trial was continued from April 22, 1994, until July 13, 1994, a period of eighty-two days. The trial date was again continued upon motion of the Commonwealth, and finally commenced on August 31, 1994. At trial, defendant moved to dismiss on the ground that he was not afforded a speedy trial. The motion was denied. Randolph was subsequently convicted by a jury.- 2 - Randolph contends that the five-month speedy trial limitation for commencing the trial elapsed on August 30, 1994, the day before the trial in fact began. He argues that January 10, 1994, the date of the preliminary hearing, should be counted as the first day against the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth argues, on the other hand, that January 10 does not count as the first day to calculate five months from the date probable cause was found. In support of his argument, defendant places significance upon the wording of Code § 19.2-243, which states

that the trial must commence "within five months from the date such probable cause was found" instead of within five months

after . (Emphasis added). We disagree with defendant's interpretation of Code § 19.2-243. Code § 1-13.3, governing the computation of time, clearly provides that when a statute or rule of court requires a notice to be given or any other act to be done within a certain time after any event or judgment, that time shall be allowed in addition to the day on which the event or judgment occurred

.

(Emphasis added). Use of the word "from" rather than "after" in Code § 19.2-243 does not preclude Code § 1-13.3 from controlling. By its terms, Code § 1-13.3 governs the very issue before the Court, which is whether "the day on which the event or judgment occurred" shall be counted in computing the time within which an

event shall be done. Accordingly, the convictions are affirmed.- 3 - Affirmed.
#### § 90.121 Canadian registration.

Form 410 shall be filed by Canadian licensees desiring to operate in the United States under the terms of Article 2 and 3 of the Convention between the United States and Canada concerning operation of Certain Radio Equipment or Stations (which entered into force May 15, 1952). This form may be obtained from the Department of Communications, Ottawa, Canada. That department should also be consulted by U.S. licensees desiring to operate in Canada.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
HOSETTA ZER TUC HE, Pla intiff-Appe lla nt,
v. JAM ES GLEASON, De fe nda

nt-Appe lle e . No. 14-15047 D.C . No. 4:11-c v-03691-YGR
M EM OR ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Sta t e s Distric t C ourt for the Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia Yvonne Gonz a le z R oge rs, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Argue d a nd Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 11, 2016 Sa n Fra n c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : SC HR OEDER

a nd NGUYEN, C irc uit Judge s, a nd ADELM AN, ** Distric t Judge
. A jury re turne d a ve rdic t in f av o r o f de fe nda

nt Ja m e s Gle a son o n pla intiff Hosse tta Ze rtuc he ’ s First A m e ndm e nt re ta lia tion c l a im u nde r 4 2 U.S.C
. § 1983. Ze rtuc he now a

ppe al s ( 1 ) t h e distric t c ourt’ s jury instruc tion d e fining a “ substa ntia l 

# FIL E D
MAR 17 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The Honora

ble Ly nn S. Ade lm a n , Distric t Judge for the U.S. Distric t C ourt for the Ea ste rn Distric t of W isc onsin, sitting by de signa tion.or m otiva

ting fa c tor” in re la tion to he r indire c t the o ry of lia bility a nd (2) the distric t
c ourt’ s de c ision to d ism iss he r punitive da m a ge s c l a im a fte r Ze rtuc he c onc l ude d he r
c a se -in-c hie f. W e a ffirm t

he distric t c ourt be c a

use ne ither

de c ision Ze rtuc he c h a l le nge s wa s pre j udic i a l. On i t s s p eci a l ve rdic t, the jury c o nc lude d tha t Ze rtuc h e ha d suffe re d n o
a dve rse e m

ploy m e n t a c tion a nd did not re a c h the qu es t i o n of whe the r G le a son’ s
a c tions we re a su bsta

ntia l or m otiva

ting fa c tor, a nd thus a n y e rror in the substa ntia l
or m otiva ting fa c t or de finition w a s ha rm le ss. C h e ss v . Dov e y , 790 F.3d 961, 977 (9th C ir. 2015). Ze rtuc he c onte nds tha t the de fi n i t i o n wa s not ha rm l e ss, a rguing tha t the
ve rdic t que stion o n whe t

he r Ze rtuc he suffe re d a

n a d ve rse e m ploy m e nt de c ision c ould ha ve c onfuse d the jury

by using la

n gua ge from

the substa

ntia l a nd m otiva ting fa c tor de finition, p o s s ib l y le a ding it to c onside r the substa ntia l a nd m otiva

ting fa c tor de finition whe n de t e rm ining the a dve rse e m ploy m e nt a c tion que s tion. W e disa gre e and find tha t the i nstruc tions a nd ve rdic t we re stra i ghtforwa rd a nd not l i k el y t o
c onfuse the jury
. Fina lly , be c a use we a ffirm the jury ’ s finding of no l ia bility , a ny e rror the c ourt m a de in dism issing t he punitive d a m a g e s c la im w a s a lso ha rm le ss. Bulgo v . Munoz , 853 F.2d 710, 716 (9th C ir. 1988). AFFIR M ED.

2
ATTACHMENT C

- KEY CONTACT LIST

Affected Facilities

British Petroleum

Chevron

ExxonMobil

Tesoro

ConocoPhillips

Valero

Rhodia

Owens Illinois

California Portland Cement Corporation

Other SOx RECLAIM facilities are listed in Table A

- 1 of the Staff Report

M anufacturers of Control Devices & Consultants

B ELCO

CANSOLV

Emerachem Power

Grace Davidson

I NTERCAT

MECS

Tri

- Mer

Others

California Air Resources Board

Northwest Air Pollution Authority

Maryland Department of Natural Resources

Puget Sound Clean Air Agency

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Western States Petroleum Association
§ 86.31 How does the Service know how much money will be available for BIG grants each year? ( a ) We estimate funds available for BIG grants each year based on the revenue projected for the Trust Fund. We include this estimate when we issue a NOFO at *http://www.grants.gov .*
( b ) We calculate the actual amount of funds available for BIG grants based on tax collections, any funds carried over from previous fiscal years, and available unobligated BIG funds.
#### § 697.1 Purpose and scope.

The regulations in this part are issued under the authority of section 804(b) of the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 5101 *et seq.,* and section 6 of the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act Appropriations Authorization, 16 U.S.C. 1851 note, and govern fishing in the EEZ on the Atlantic Coast for species covered by those acts.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax Credit Fund VI, L.P., Series 7 (the “Partnership”) for the quarter ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership, hereby certify that:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Partnership.











/s/ WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.


Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.


President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.




­­­October 4, 2010
# CTAS Application Proposal Abstract

Applicants must include a detailed proposal abstract for each purpose area under which the applicant is requesting funding. The proposal abstract is completed in the Just Grants web-based form. It should summarize the proposed project (no more than 400 words) including primary activities, products and deliverables, the service area, and who will benefit from the proposed project. Proposal abstracts should be

a. written for a public audience;

b. in paragraph form, without bullets or tables and excluding personally identifiable information;

c. specific to the project proposed for the respective purpose area(s). 

The proposal abstract will not be scored.

## Federally Recognized Tribe

[Insert Applicant Legal Name] is a federally recognized tribe located in [Insert county, state]. With this funding, [Insert Name of the Program] will [Insert itemized goals of project].

## Consortium of Federally Recognized Tribes

[Insert Applicant Legal Name] is a consortium of federally recognized tribes located in [Insert county, state]. [Insert Applicant Legal Name] represents the following tribes for the purposes of this grant application [Insert name of federally recognized tribes]. With this funding, [Insert Name of the Program] will: [Insert itemized goals of project].

## Authorized Designee

[Insert Applicant Legal Name] is a [select “tribal organization” or “tribal nonprofit”] located in [Insert county, state]. [Insert Applicant Legal Name] is a duly authorized designee of [Insert name of federally recognized tribe(s) the applicant is designated by], a federally recognized tribe. The tribe has (1) authorized [Insert Applicant Legal Name] to apply on behalf of the tribe and (2) stated its support for the project and its commitment to participate in the project upon receiving this funding. With this funding, [Insert Name of the Program] will: [Insert itemized goals of project].

## Additional question for applicants in multiple purpose areas

If you are requesting funding in multiple purpose areas, is the receipt of funding in a particular purpose area required for the implementation of any other purpose area being requested? If so, explain. An example of this would be submitting a request for funding of an officer from BJA Purpose Area #3 and a request for funding for equipment for that officer from COPS Office Purpose Area #1.

FY 2024

Page 1
Argued and submitted February 4,

reversed and remanded March 9, 1994

#### In the Matter of the Compensation of Ronald L. Eagon, Claimant. SAIF CORPORATION and Vasquez Landscaping & Management, *Petitioners, v.*Ronald L. EAGON; Old Trapper Smoked Products; and Liberty Northwest Insurance Corporation, *Respondents.*

(91-14044, 91-07389, 91-07388, 91-14043; CA A77264)

869 P2d 905

Steve Cotton, Special Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

John E. Uffelman filed the brief and waived oral argument for respondent Ronald L. Eagon.

James D. McVittie filed the brief and waived oral argument for respondents Liberty Northwest Insurance Corporation and Old Trapper Smoked Products.

Before Rossman, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Leeson, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded. *SAIF v. Drews,*318 Or 1, 860 P2d 254 (1993).
Your session is about to expire.Resume session

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Welcome.Log inorregisterCOPS OFFICE RESOURCE CENTER

HomeCatalogCartOrders

                    

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                CatalogMatches: 1Offline form Recent Popular Online Print OtherCOPS-W0731Building Relationships of Trust: Commonly Used TermsThis resource provides descriptions of terms law enforcement officers commonly use when working with the community. This glossary is one piece of the broader Building Relationships of Trust Toolkit: https://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter?item=COPS-W0735.By Institute for Intergovernmental ResearchCategories: Community PartnershipsLanguage: EnglishPublic linkhttps://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter?item=cops-w0731Click here to see the entire catalog.Cart:Download PDFWeb • Jun 2014Search catalogreset title abstract authors contentContaining text: exact phraseNot containing text: exact phraseLanguage:anyEnglishSpanishHmongVietnameseCategory:anyAlternatives to IncarcerationCommunity PartnershipsData and AnalysisEthics and IntegrityFoundations of Community PolicingHiring, Recruitment, and RetentionHomeland SecurityNew Immigrant CommunitiesNonviolent CrimeOtherPolice OperationsPOP Center ResourceSchool and Campus SafetyTechnologyTribalViolent CrimeYouth SafetyPublished after:Published before:Page1

                    

FOIA | No FEAR Act | Open Government | Privacy | Legal|HelpCopyright (C) U.S. Department of Justice, COPS Office, IT Division, 2012 - 2024. All rights reserved.
Rendered on Mon Mar 4 2024 at 02:22 (UTC-5) in 0.20 secEnterprise Framework 3.21.7.7 • Store Controls 3.3.1.7Survey 500303407 Section 60000560 Rules Hints Inactive